Skip to content

Contemplative Science and Buddhist Science

John D. Dunne

The Oxford Handbook of Buddhist Practice May 19, 2022 DOI: 10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190632922.013.32 (opens in new tab)

Study at a glance

AI-extracted from the abstract
Characteristics Theoretical or philosophical paper Peer reviewed
Topics Buddhism
Key points Argues that critiques of 'Buddhist science' are in at least one context inaccurate and exaggerated, and that the thematization of experience in both contemplative science and Buddhist science poses significant challenges for research on contemplative practices.

Abstract

Abstract The scientific study of Buddhist and Buddhism-derived practices such as mindfulness meditation has accelerated dramatically since the start of the twenty-first century, and this dramatic increase in research emerges from a vibrant community of inquiry that often adopts the moniker of “contemplative science.” This chapter begins with a brief history of contemplative science, focusing on the pivotal role of the Mind and Life Institute, and then examines a related and even more contentious term: “Buddhist science.” Rooted in the notion that Buddhism is exceptional in its compatibility with science, Buddhist science has been the target of critiques that, in at least one context, turn out to be inaccurate and exaggerated. The chapter concludes by examining how the thematization of experience, which emerges from common assumptions in both contemplative science and Buddhist science, leads to significant challenges in conducting research on contemplative practices.

Comparable studies

Other theoretical and historical papers on buddhism, most cited first.

Citations in the library

Explore topics